https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329542 The Court interpreted provisions related to invisible loss in the VAT Act, emphasizing the need for dealers to demonstrate compliance with Section 19 restrictions when claiming refunds under Section 18(2). It held that assessing officers must verify representations and not use uniform percentages for invisible loss. The judgment set aside previous orders based on ad hoc percentages, stressing procedural fairness. The Court allowed the writ petition, remanding the matter for fresh proceedings in line with the judgment's directions, underscoring the importance of due process in refund assessments under the VAT Act. en-us Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Jul 2016 12:59:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329542 The Court interpreted provisions related to invisible loss in the VAT Act, emphasizing the need for dealers to demonstrate compliance with Section 19 restrictions when claiming refunds under Section 18(2). It held that assessing officers must verify representations and not use uniform percentages for invisible loss. The judgment set aside previous orders based on ad hoc percentages, stressing procedural fairness. The Court allowed the writ petition, remanding the matter for fresh proceedings in line with the judgment's directions, underscoring the importance of due process in refund assessments under the VAT Act. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 16 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329542